U.S. Won't Concede Control of Internet Root Servers

AP ^ | 6/30/2005 | Anick Jesdanun

[Little Ray]

Good idea. "International Bodies" can screw up anything. Imagine an Internet with the PRC and Saudi Arabia as the supervisors...

[RKV]

We invented the internet. It was called the ARPANET for an agency of the FedGov we now call DARPA. Typical UN/one worlder nonsense. Give up something of value for nothing. IXNAY.

[Prince Caspian]

What does Al Gore say?

[hiredhand]

I seriously doubt if we will EVER give up control of it. The "World Wide Web" doesn't exist without DNS. Whoever controls DNS is on equal footing with those who control the core routers which exchange routes between backbones.

Something that not many usually think about is that to control the DNS is to control ALL e-mail routing. There's a LOT of INTEL value in being able to do that, even if it's not sensitive info on an individual basis.

Think of it like this. Imagine being able to send e-mail destined for whitehouse.gov anywhere you wanted. Then, keep a copy and forward it on to it's intended destination. This is the sort of thing that could happen.

For that matter, replace whitehouse.gov, with army.mil, or af.mil. It's really a nobrainer if one controls the root DNS servers.

To give up control of the root DNS servers would be supremely stupid.

[Right_at_RiceU]

plus, you know, thats our porn, not theirs...

[3AngelaD]

Notice that once again, the college professors live on a different planet than the rest of us. They think turning the internet over the likes of Kofi Annan would be a great idea. If those penny-ante Third World countries want to control an internet, let them invent their own and pay for it.

[Clara Lou]

I seriously doubt if we will EVER give up control of it.
I think we'll give it up quick enough if Hellary or the likes of Gore or Kerry ever become POTUS. ~~shudder~~

[VRWCmember]

Some countries have pressed to move oversight to an international body, such as the U.N. International Telecommunication Union, although the U.S. government has historically had that role because it funded much of the Internet's early development.

The US funded it. The US should not under any circumstances relinquish control over it to some "international body".

[cyborg]

Look at the UN. Does I need to go any deeper than that??

[You Dirty Rats]

If the USA doesn't do it, then the UN will, and I for one don't want Kofi Annan's son making a fortune controlling this.

[Publius6961]

The declaration won't immediately affect Internet users, but it could have political ramifications by putting in writing what some critics had already feared

Some critics can go to hell.
We already know that the internet can be referred to as the terrorist planning network, albeit inadvertently.
If there is any hope of ever inhibiting use of the internet by terrorists, killers, extortionists and scammers, we certainly wnat the UN to controlling it. Right?
Right?

[Always Right]

I think we'll give it up quick enough if Hellary or the likes of Gore or Kerry ever become POTUS. ~~shudder~~

Yep, kind of like Carter giving up the Panama Canal. Then the GOP lacks the backbone to correct such a dufus move. Of course, the web is much more important to everyday commerce then the Canal, so having it in the hands of responsible people is vital.

[July 4th]

I don't think there's anything wrong with ICANN running the show themselves. I think the problem arises when the UN and its minions get pushy and demand that ICANN cede control to a UN agency. Then you've got an issue.

[hiredhand]

Not to make those people sound any dumber than they are. ;-)... but to give away the root DNS servers is to give away a great deal of power. Liberals would rather push needles into their eyeballs and torture their aging parents than give away power. :-)

The only way leftists would give it away would be if somebody simply didn't understand exactly what they were giving away. It would be a collosal mistake.

[cripplecreek]

A lot of us talk to people around the world about problematic things like freedom and UN corruption. I think theres a growing anti UN sentiment in the world and I don't think they can afford it.

[South40]

I seriously doubt if we will EVER give up control of it.

That's probably very similar to what people said when theyt first heard the idea of the US giving up control of the Panama Canal, and we know how that ended.

[bobdsmith]

"Think of it like this. Imagine being able to send e-mail destined for whitehouse.gov anywhere you wanted. Then, keep a copy and forward it on to it's intended destination. This is the sort of thing that could happen."

All the DNS servers provide is a look up service mapping hostnames to IPs. You cannot do what you describe above. The best you can do is take a peak at what hostnames people want resolved (and I am not even sure if that is possible considering that these roots are probably dealing with requests from DNS servers of ISP's and not directly those of individuals)

Owning the DNS roots is nothing near ownership of the internet. As the article points out, anyone could set up an alternative set of DNS servers.

[Calpernia]

bump!

[Captain Rhino]

Sort of like the United Nations Human Rights Commission with Libya, Iran, and China as voting members??